[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YQnkGMxZCgCWXQPf@mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 20:49:28 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Leonidas P. Papadakos" <papadakospan@...il.com>,
Konstantin Komarov <almaz.alexandrovich@...agon-software.com>,
zajec5@...il.com, "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] vboxsf fixes for 5.14-1
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 05:10:22PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> The user-space FUSE thing does indeed work reasonably well.
>
> It performs horribly badly if you care about things like that, though.
>
> In fact, your own numbers kind of show that:
>
> ntfs/default: 670 tests, 55 failures, 211 skipped, 34783 seconds
> ntfs3/default: 664 tests, 67 failures, 206 skipped, 8106 seconds
>
> and that's kind of the point of ntfs3.
Sure, although if you run fstress in parallel ntfs3 will lock up, the
system hard, and it has at least one lockdep deadlock complaints.
It's not up to me, but personally, I'd feel better if *someone* at
Paragon Software responded to Darrrick and my queries about their
quality assurance, and/or made commitments that they would at least
*try* to fix the problems that about 5 minutes of testing using
fstests turned up trivially.
I can even give them patches and configsto make it trivially easy for
them to run fstests using KVM or GCE....
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists